• You are using the old High Contrast theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.

Youth disarmament lesson

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jsalcedo

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2002
Messages
3,683
This from the WTA list:

I thought you might like to hear about a gun lesson 66 youth, age 12- 19,
learned at Camp American in Indiana last week. Campers were "issued"
small water guns for the purpose of playing some competetive team games.
For the final game, each team was told to keep their 2 best guns and turn
the rest in. The sheep were willingly lead to the slaughter in spite of
the class on gun ownership they had attended only hours earlier. As each
team completed their final competition, they were instructed to sit on the
basketball court. As the final team finished and sat on the court, out of
the woods came 5 staff members, adorned in blue berets and carrying huge
water guns. Naturally, the 66 mostly unarmed, campers were "slaughtered"
by the 5 with the "assault weapons".

After a few minutes of chaos, the "wounded and dead" were again
assembled on the basketball court and asked if they knew what had
just happened. By this time, the details of the earlier class were
beginning to sink in. They now realized that they should never have
surrendered their guns. They also realized that in spite of the fact that
20 lucky students still possessed arms, that they were no match for the 5
"assault style" weapons. These students learned never to give up their
arms and they learned the importance of lifting the ban on assault
weapons.

To find out more about Camp American go to www.campamerican.com .
Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of American will be a featured guest
instructor at the North Carolina Camp American next month. If you
would like to know more, contact [email protected] .
 
I'm sorry, but it just doesn't work that way. This is as much biased propaganda as VPC or the Brady Bunch put together in their pamplets. Why don't we actually teach them firearm safety, shooting, and to respect the firearms, laws, and people instead of sticking waterguns in peoples' hands trying to create an accurate analogy for them.
 
"Why should anyone respect laws that deny constitutuonal rights?"

Am I reading that right? Are you advocating breaking laws? What then makes you better than any other criminal? How do you intend to ever be taken as a responsible person who is rallying for your rights if you are a criminal? Where do you draw the line once you begin breaking these laws? We should respect the laws simply to be law-abiding citizens. If you want to change them, work to change them, don't ignore them.
 
Boy that was too easy. :scrutiny:

Just for the record, I obey all laws that I know about.

I have CHL and Curio and relics license so I am working through the system to get what I want.


The point this all boils down to:

If congress passed a law saying "turn em all in or face federal prison"

Would the wisdom of being a law abiding citizen still apply?

I think that is what campamerican was teaching these youth.


MJRW I'm not here to make enemies and I mean no disrespect in my posts.
 
There is a difference between rebelling or protesting and law breaking. And you just advocated teaching law breaking to minors. We gun owners are facing enough challenges as it is. But to arm the opposition with evidence that gun owners and criminals is in fact synonymous does nothing at all to help the cause. And as soon as you start ignoring the laws simply because you don't want to, you have in fact become a criminal. Constitutional or not, it is unfortunately still a law. Unless of course you are rebelling, then you can give me a call.
 
Once a month for the past five years I taught traffic school for traffic offenders. Each month better than 95% were in class for speeding violations. I dare say the American public is quite used to violating laws that inconvenience them.

Pilgrim
 
Who was it who said, "A law contrary to the Constitution is void?" I haven't pressed this one yet myself, as I'd rather eat worms than have to talk to a policeman.:eek:
 
Gentlemen,
there is a difference between The Law and legislation. While legislation ends up as "laws" on the books, not all legislation is "lawful."
 
"All Laws Which Are Repugnant To The Constitution Are Null And Void"
Marbury vs Madison 5 U.S. 137, 174, 176

"Where Rights Secured By The Constitution Are Involved, There Can Be No Rule Making Or Legislation Which Would Abrogate Them."
Miranda vs Arizona 384 U.S. 436 p. 491

"The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the name and form of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose; since its unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment...Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection and justifies no acts performed under it...A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it."
16 Am Jur 2d sec. 177, late Am Jur 2d sec. 256

Need more?:p
 
I have read the thread starting message several times and fail to see where it encourages young people to violate the law. I instead saw it as an exercise to demonstrate what happens to people when they surrender to the "rules", even if it puts them at a disadvantage.

Rules are made by people who want to control their environment. They don't necessarily do it for the good of the people. During the 1992 Los Angeles riot, the mayor and chief of police by emergency decree closed the gun stores and forbade the sales of ammunition. Did that make Los Angeles a safer place for the average citizen? Did the average citizen say, "That's a good idea. I was going to buy ammunition for my dusty revolver my father gave me, but now I will not." No, the average citizen drove out of Los Angeles to neighboring communities and bought all the ammunition he could get.

During that same riot I know that the local National Guardsmen, activated and standing by for orders to go to Los Angeles, bought up all the .223 and 9mm ammunition they could get their hands on. Now why did they do that? Maybe because they had experience with rules, and were certain that some REMF whose neck was not at risk would come up with some silly rule that they should have minimal or no ammunition because it would unnecessarily inflame the riot participants. Too many "protected" classes who are also criminals might get their just rewards.

I saw instead of encouraging law breaking at the camp, a practical demonstration on how life really works. A good thing, I think, for young teenagers to learn. In fact, I was so impressed with the Camp American program, I am toying with the idea of volunteering my services one summer as a staff worker.

Pilgrim
 
Great object lesson, IMO. As for advocating breaking laws -- some laws ought to be broken and anyone trying to enforce them, killed. Treblinka death camp was legal under the laws of that time and place...so what? Same for a few laws I can think of in our time.
 
I'm sorry, but it just doesn't work that way. This is as much biased propaganda as VPC or the Brady Bunch put together in their pamplets. Why don't we actually teach them firearm safety, shooting, and to respect the firearms, laws, and people instead of sticking waterguns in peoples' hands trying to create an accurate analogy for them.
Click to expand...

It worked just exactly that way. Teaching firearm safety, respect and to never surrender the tools of protection, provision and defense to the government all works together.
 
MJRW: So it is "law uber alles," eh? Like the lawful genocide of Jews by Nazis, ane the lawful slavery of blacks in America pre civil war?
 
Ever heard of civil disobediance, MJRW? It's our duty to peacefully disobey immoral or unjust laws.
 
There is an excellent article in the latest issue of The Independent Review. The subject is Constitutional Govt, and it has a quick and easy breakdown of the two main tenets of the rule of law, which are (a) The Law is generally accepted norms of conduct of general application to all (both citizens and authority), and (b) citizens are not obliged to obey commands (i.e. legislation) that does not conform to The Law.

There is more to the Rule of Law than that, of course, but it addresses the point of this thread. I'd gladly expound more later.
 
In fact, I think it was the Rev. MLK JR. who said WTTEO "those who disobey unjust laws are in fact expressing the highest respect for the law"
 
someone else here reads the indepedant review? Right on :)

Hey, where did MJRW go. I'd like to see some counterarguments to all this crazy 'pro-freedom' talk. j/k :)

atek3
 
It is all very well that the citizens of this great democracy are not bound to obey laws contravening the constitution, BUT... :scrutiny:
A law could be the most blatently unconstitutional piece of claptrap ever written, and if you violate it, you will rot in jail a long time waiting for SCOTUS to weigh in on its shortcomings. :(
The best defense for this sort of thing, is a very aggressive offense, that keeps it off the books to begin with. Shoot first, as it were, and ask questions later.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top